Food habits of Atlantic white-sided dolphins (Lagenorhynchus acutus) off the coast of New England

This paper is not subject to U.S. copyright. The definitive version was published in Fishery Bulletin 107 (2009): 384–394.Although the Atlantic white-sided dolphin (Lagenorhynchus acutus) is one of the most common dolphins off New England, little has been documented about its diet in the western North Atlantic Ocean. Current federal protection of marine mammals limits the supply of animals for investigation to those incidentally caught in the nets of commercial fishermen with observers aboard. Stomachs of 62 L. acutus were examined; of these 62 individuals, 28 of them were caught by net and 34 were animals stranded on Cape Cod. Most of the net-caught L. acutus were from the deeper waters of the Gulf of Maine. A single stomach was from the continental slope south of Georges Bank. At least twenty-six fish species and three cephalopod species were eaten. The predominant prey were silver hake (Merluccius bilinearis), spoonarm octopus (Bathypolypus bairdii), and haddock (Melanogrammus aeglefinus). The stomach from a net-caught L. acutus on the continental slope contained 7750 otoliths of the Madeira lanternfish (Ceratoscopelus maderensis). Sand lances (Ammodytes spp.) were the most abundant (541 otoliths) species in the stomachs of stranded L. acutus. Seasonal variation in diet was indicated; pelagic Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus) was the most important prey in summer, but was rare in winter. The average length of fish prey was approximately 200 mm, and the average mantle length of cephalopod prey was approximately 50 mm

Cetaceans of the cape verde archipelago

inexistenteinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

What bycatch tells us about the diet of harbor and gray seals and overlap with commercial fishermen

Northwest Atlantic harbor (Phoca vitulina vitulina) and gray (Halichoerus grypus atlantica) seal populations are recovering from early to mid-20th century exploitation, increasing their biological interactions and bycatch in Northeastern US commercial fisheries. We evaluated the seals’ diet composition and compared their prey to commercial catches to assess trophic overlap and potential competition with commercial fisherman target catches. We obtained 148 harbor and 178 gray seal stomach samples from bycatch events that occurred between 2004 and 2018. We learned from the hard part remains that the majority of seals bycaught are young-of-the-year (≤12 months old) that consume a wide breadth of prey across three trophic groups. There was a general dichotomy in extrinsic factors associated with seal diet in which 45% trophic niche separation was explained by non-overlapping harbor and gray seal phenology and pup haul-out locations that are adjacent to active fishing areas. Prey size estimated from fish otoliths and squid beaks recovered from stomach contents showed that gray seals consumed larger prey than harbor seals and prey sizes from both seals showed limited overlap with prey sizes caught by commercial gillnet fishermen. The most important prey to both seals included large (>20 cm) and small (≤20 cm) silver hake (Merluccius bilinearis), (≤40 cm) red hake (Urophycis chuss), gulf stream flounder (Citharichthys arctifrons), medium (21–40 cm) white hake (Urophycis tenuis), and (<50 cm) Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua). Important prey to harbor seals that did not overlap with gray seals were Acadian redfish (Sebastes fasciatus), Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus), longfin (Doryteuthis pealeii), and shortfin squid (Illex illecebrosus). They contrasted with prey important to gray seals that did not overlap with harbor seals: yellowtail flounder (Limanda ferruginea), sand lance (Ammodytes spp.), Urophycis spp., and fourspot flounder (Hippoglossina oblonga). Despite the potential bias associated with opportunistic bycatch sampling, this study demonstrates the importance and value of utilizing carcasses retained from bycatch events, is complimentary to newer methodologies (i.e., DNA meta-barcoding), and fills data gaps in our understanding of the role recovering harbor and gray seal populations have on Northeastern US regional food webs

North Atlantic right whale foraging ecology and its role in human-caused mortality

© The Author(s), 2017. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Marine Ecology Progress Series 581 (2017): 165-181, doi:10.3354/meps12315.Endangered North Atlantic right whales Eubalaena glacialis suffer from unacceptably high rates of ship strikes and fishing gear entanglements, but little is known of the role that diving and foraging behavior plays in mediating human-caused mortality. We conducted a study of right whale foraging ecology by attaching tags to whales for short periods of time (hours), tracking their movements during daytime, and repeatedly sampling oceanographic conditions and prey distribution along the whales’ tracks. Right whales were tagged from late winter to late fall in 6 regions of the Gulf of Maine and southwestern Scotian Shelf from 2000 to 2010. The diving behavior of the tagged whales was governed by the vertical distribution of their primary prey, the copepod Calanus finmarchicus. On average, right whales tagged during spring spent 72% of their time in the upper 10 m (within the draft of most large commercial vessels), indicating the need for expanded ship speed restrictions in western Gulf of Maine springtime habitats. One out of every 4 whales dove to within 5 m of the sea floor during the short time they were tagged, spending as much as 45% of their total tagged time in this depth stratum. Right whales dove to the sea floor in each habitat studied except for one (where only 1 whale was tagged). This relatively high incidence of near-bottom diving raises serious concerns about the continued use of floating ground lines in pot and trap gear in coastal Maine and Canadian waters.Support for this research was provided by the NOAA Right Whale Grants Program, Northeast Consortium, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, NOAA Northeast Fisheries Science Center, and the Office of Naval Research

Low frequency vocalizations attributed to sei whales (Balaenoptera borealis)

Author Posting. © Acoustical Society of America, 2008. This article is posted here by permission of Acoustical Society of America for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 124 (2008): 1339-1349, doi:10.1121/1.2945155.Low frequency (<100 Hz) downsweep vocalizations were repeatedly recorded from ocean gliders east of Cape Cod, MA in May 2005. To identify the species responsible for this call, arrays of acoustic recorders were deployed in this same area during 2006 and 2007. 70 h of collocated visual observations at the center of each array were used to compare the localized occurrence of this call to the occurrence of three baleen whale species: right, humpback, and sei whales. The low frequency call was significantly associated only with the occurrence of sei whales. On average, the call swept from 82 to 34 Hz over 1.4 s and was most often produced as a single call, although pairs and (more rarely) triplets were occasionally detected. Individual calls comprising the pairs were localized to within tens of meters of one another and were more similar to one another than to contemporaneous calls by other whales, suggesting that paired calls may be produced by the same animal. A synthetic kernel was developed to facilitate automatic detection of this call using spectrogram-correlation methods. The optimal kernel missed 14% of calls, and of all the calls that were automatically detected, 15% were false positives.Funding was provided by the NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service and the WHOI Ocean Life Institute

Evidence of a North Atlantic right whale calf (Eubalaena glacialis) born in northeastern U.S. waters

Author Posting. © The Author(s), 2008. This is the author's version of the work. It is posted here by permission of John Wiley & Sons for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Marine Mammal Science 25 (2009): 462-477, doi:10.1111/j.1748-7692.2008.00261.x.The general temporal and geographical patterns of North Atlantic right whale (Eubalaena glacialis) calving events have been clarified during the last quarter century of research (Kraus and Rolland 2007). Right whales give birth to a single calf every three to five years after a twelve- to thirteen-month gestation period (Best 1994; Kraus and Hatch 2001). Most calves are born between December and March in the coastal waters of the southeastern U.S., the only known calving ground for this species (Kraus et al. 2007; Winn et al. 1986). Although historical whaling records suggest that there were once two winter calving grounds, one off the southeastern U.S. and the other off northwestern Africa, it appears that only the former is still used today (Notarbartolo di Sciara et al. 1998; Reeves and Mitchell 1986; 1988). In the late winter, right whales leave the calving grounds and migrate to their foraging grounds off the northeastern U.S. and Canadian Maritimes. North Atlantic right whales can be found in Cape Cod and Massachusetts Bays throughout the late winter and early spring (Hamilton and Mayo 1990; Mayo and Marx 1990; Schevill et al. 1986), in the Great South Channel during mid-spring to early summer (Kenney et al. 1995), and in the Bay of Fundy (Kraus et al. 1982) and on the Scotian Shelf (Mitchell et al. 1986; Stone et al. 1988) during the summer and fall. Some individuals (mostly pregnant females and juveniles) return to the calving grounds off the southeastern U.S. in December and January, but the location of the rest of the population during those months is currently unknown (although recent evidence suggests that right whales are present in the Gulf of Maine and on the Scotian Shelf throughout the winter (Mellinger et al. 2007; T. Cole pers comm. ; S. Van Parijs pers comm. )

Discrimination between bycatch and other causes of cetacean and pinniped stranding

© The Author(s), 2018. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 127 (2018): 83-95, doi:10.3354/dao03189.The challenge of identifying cause of death in discarded bycaught marine mammals stems from a combination of the non-specific nature of the lesions of drowning, the complex physiologic adaptations unique to breath-holding marine mammals, lack of case histories, and the diverse nature of fishing gear. While no pathognomonic lesions are recognized, signs of acute external entanglement, bulging or reddened eyes, recently ingested gastric contents, pulmonary changes, and decompression-associated gas bubbles have been identified in the condition of peracute underwater entrapment (PUE) syndrome in previous studies of marine mammals. We reviewed the gross necropsy and histopathology reports of 36 cetaceans and pinnipeds including 20 directly observed bycaught and 16 live stranded animals that were euthanized between 2005 and 2011 for lesions consistent with PUE. We identified 5 criteria which present at significantly higher rates in bycaught marine mammals: external signs of acute entanglement, red or bulging eyes, recently ingested gastric contents, multi-organ congestion, and disseminated gas bubbles detected grossly during the necropsy and histologically. In contrast, froth in the trachea or primary bronchi, and lung changes (i.e. wet, heavy, froth, edema, congestion, and hemorrhage) were poor indicators of PUE. This is the first study that provides insight into the different published parameters for PUE in bycatch. For regions frequently confronted by stranded marine mammals with non-specific lesions, this could potentially aid in the investigation and quantification of marine fisheries interactions.This work was supported by the Nat - ional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) John H. Prescott Program NA12NMF4390144. The WHOI Marine Mammal Center, Wick and Sloan Simmons, and the University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria provided postdoctoral funding for Y.B.Q

Food habits of Sowerby's beaked whales (Mesoplodon bidens) taken in the pelagic drift gillnet fishery of the western North Atlantic

We describe the food habits of the Sowerby’s beaked whale (Mesoplodon bidens) from observations of 10 individuals taken as bycatch in the pelagic drift gillnet fishery for Swordfish (Xiphias gladius) in the western North Atlantic and 1 stranded individual from Kennebunk, Maine. The stomachs of 8 bycaught whales were intact and contained prey. The diet of these 8 whales was dominated by meso- and benthopelagic fishes that composed 98.5% of the prey items found in their stomachs and cephalopods that accounted for only 1.5% of the number of prey. Otoliths and jaws representing at least 31 fish taxa from 15 families were present in the stomach contents. Fishes, primarily from the families Moridae (37.9% of prey), Myctophidae (22.9%), Macrouridae (11.2%), and Phycidae (7.2%), were present in all 8 stomachs. Most prey were from 5 fish taxa: Shortbeard Codling (Laemonema barbatulum) accounted for 35.3% of otoliths, Cocco’s Lanternfish (Lobianchia gemellarii) contributed 12.9%, Marlin-spike (Nezumia bairdii) composed 10.8%, lanternfishes (Lampanyctus spp.) accounted for 8.4%; and Longfin Hake (Phycis chesteri) contributed 6.7%. The mean number of otoliths per stomach was 1196 (range: 327–3452). Most of the fish prey found in the stomachs was quite small, ranging in length from 4.0 to 27.7 cm. We conclude that the Sowerby’s beaked whales that we examined in this study fed on large numbers of relatively small meso- and benthopelagic fishes that are abundant along the slope and shelf break of the western North Atlantic

An assessment of temporal, spatial and taxonomic trends in harmful algal toxin exposure in stranded marine mammals from the US New England coast

© The Author(s), 2021. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Fire, S. E., Bogomolni, A., DiGiovanni, R. A., Jr., Early, G., Leighfield, T. A., Matassa, K., Miller, G. A., Moore, K. M. T., Moore, M., Niemeyer, M., Pugliares, K., Wang, Z., & Wenzel, F. W. An assessment of temporal, spatial and taxonomic trends in harmful algal toxin exposure in stranded marine mammals from the US New England coast. Plos One, 16(1),(2021): e0243570, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0243570.Despite a long-documented history of severe harmful algal blooms (HABs) in New England coastal waters, corresponding HAB-associated marine mammal mortality events in this region are far less frequent or severe relative to other regions where HABs are common. This long-term survey of the HAB toxins saxitoxin (STX) and domoic acid (DA) demonstrates significant and widespread exposure of these toxins in New England marine mammals, across multiple geographic, temporal and taxonomic groups. Overall, 19% of the 458 animals tested positive for one or more toxins, with 15% and 7% testing positive for STX and DA, respectively. 74% of the 23 different species analyzed demonstrated evidence of toxin exposure. STX was most prevalent in Maine coastal waters, most frequently detected in common dolphins (Delphinus delphis), and most often detected during July and October. DA was most prevalent in animals sampled in offshore locations and in bycaught animals, and most frequently detected in mysticetes, with humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) testing positive at the highest rates. Feces and urine appeared to be the sample matrices most useful for determining the presence of toxins in an exposed animal, with feces samples having the highest concentrations of STX or DA. No relationship was found between the bloom season of toxin-producing phytoplankton and toxin detection rates, however STX was more likely to be present in July and October. No relationship between marine mammal dietary preference and frequency of toxin detection was observed. These findings are an important part of a framework for assessing future marine mammal morbidity and mortality events, as well as monitoring ecosystem health using marine mammals as sentinel organisms for predicting coastal ocean changes.S.F. - NOAA John H. Prescott Marine Mammal Rescue Assistance Grant Program #NA16NMF4390151 S.F. - NOAA John H. Prescott Marine Mammal Rescue Assistance Grant Program #NA17NMF4390082 S.F. - Florida Tech Department of Biological Sciences S.F. - Florida Tech John H. Evans Library Open Access Subvention Fund. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript

Fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus) mitogenomics: A cautionary tale of defining sub-species from mitochondrial sequence monophyly

The advent of massive parallel sequencing technologies has resulted in an increase of studies based upon complete mitochondrial genome DNA sequences that revisit the taxonomic status within and among species. Spatially distinct monophyly in such mitogenomic genealogies, i.e., the sharing of a recent common ancestor among con-specific samples collected in the same region has been viewed as evidence for subspecies. Several recent studies in cetaceans have employed this criterion to suggest subsequent intraspecific taxonomic revisions. We reason that employing intra-specific, spatially distinct monophyly at non-recombining, clonally inherited genomes is an unsatisfactory criterion for defining subspecies based upon theoretical (genetic drift) and practical (sampling effort) arguments. This point was illustrated by a re-analysis of a global mitogenomic assessment of fin whales, Balaenoptera physalus spp., published by Archer et al. (2013), which proposed to further subdivide the Northern Hemisphere fin whale subspecies, B. p. physalus. The proposed revision was based upon the detection of spatially distinct monophyly among North Atlantic and North Pacific fin whales in a genealogy based upon complete mitochondrial genome DNA sequences. The extended analysis conducted in this study (1676 mitochondrial control region, 162 complete mitochondrial genome DNA sequences and 20 microsatellite loci genotyped in 380 samples) revealed that the apparent monophyly among North Atlantic fin whales reported by Archer et al. (2013) to be due to low sample sizes. In conclusion, defining sub-species from monophyly (i.e., the absence of para- or polyphyly) can lead to erroneous conclusions due to relatively 'trivial' aspects, such as sampling. Basic population genetic processes (i.e., genetic drift and migration) also affect the time to the most recent common ancestor and hence the probability that individuals in a sample are monophyletic